Shelterforce uses the power of journalism to inspire, inform, and hold accountable all those working toward more just, equitable, and thriving communities-places where every person has a place to call home.
We write about affordable housing, organizing, community development, equity, and lots more. Find us online at www.shelterforce.org.
Michigan affordable.housing is based on greed, scams, and waitlist. I say this based on my experiences. They apartments will invute you to apply, knowing they aren't going to rent to you. They may as well call it scam for application fees. Michigan housing system is a complete joke. especially the LIHTC Program.
I'm disabled, I ended up moving into one of these places in Tucson, AZ. When I first stopped in to see if anything was available and how much, I was told that due to my disability income my rent would be $572 a month. So I paid for the application and I waited. On 3/1 I was told I was accepted, so I came in to do the lease and pay deposits. After I had already signed I was told my rent was now $872. I was then told that I could wait and see if anything became available at the $572, it would be 6 months to a year, but I could wait. Meanwhile I was losing my home and would be homeless long before that time, and I was left with little option. I knew it would be tight, but I was promised to be put at the top of the list for the reduced rent. So I moved in. I signed the final papers and took keys on 3/11/24. Shortly after moving in I get a letter in the mail from the office, it is a notice of rent increase to $963 dated 4/17. My income is only $1250 a month. I call the office to tell them I just signed a lease only to find out that the original manager was no longer there, and the new lady told me it did not matter, my rent was going up, I could always move out but as I had signed a lease I would still have to pay them. I have called everywhere and no one can do anything at all about this farce. These properties should NOT be allowed to operate in this manner. I can't help but wonder just how many more people out there have been backed into a corner like I was and were tricked by one of these LIHTC properties. HUD needs to reign these properties in and get them under control.
13:49 "treating housing as a commodity" is where affordable-housing and HUD organizations fail us, because as they talk rightly about the need for HCV, Section 8, rent control and more affordable rentals, they spend the other 50% of the time screaming that we poor need to buy a house. "Rent cars, buy houses" one wag said. That perpetuates the problem. Also making it into a competition between White poor and non-White poor perpetuates the problem. Thanks for this great webinar with up-to-date info on this ridiculously complicated system.
Thank you for this webinar. I'm interested in Mr. Mallach's recommendation to eliminate qualified census tracts (QCTs) at the 55:30 mark. If I understand him correctly, he says that on a federal level it drives investment into areas that have trouble sustaining public services and other services due to low tax revenues. I'm a member of Western Queens Community Land Trust and an impact real estate investor creating deeply affordable units for marginalized populations. WQCLT recently looked at a site that has potential to be developed into affordable housing and community facilities. The site was located in a tract that qualified as a QCT two years ago, but recently didn't qualify for the designation by a very small amount. It's in an area that's overall economically healthy (at least, on a federal context), and is located nearby many different public services (transportation, government services, amenities, etc). Furthermore, this area is expensive to develop in, with extreme increases in land and housing prices, as well as resulting displacement of low-income households. Any community-oriented development in the area could really use the extra amount provided by QCT designation. In short: the site doesn't have the problems common to QCTs that Mr. Mallach brought up, and could sorely use the QCTs designation. Like Oksana (hi, Oksana!), I'm NYC-based and focused, so I don't know what the political pros/cons would be to this suggestion - particularly on a federal level - but perhaps instead of eliminating QCTs altogether, QCT designation/qualification could be evaluated based on proximity to infrastructure. That being said, I think the pros and cons of eliminating QCTs vs. including this new criteria should be evaluated on a federal context.
Yesterday's rich - biggest house on the block. Today's rich - leveraging their starter home to beat out a slightly younger couple on a second purchase and rent it to them. All while humble-bragging about making family their priority and living their best life.
"The modern banking system manufactures money out of nothing. The process is perhaps the most astounding piece of sleight of hand that was ever invented." -Sir Josiah Stamp, former Bank president
This the closest anyone has come to an accurate explanation to what is actually going on. Money is being made from the manipulation of money rather than by the production of real assets. Profit is being made by extraction of *land rent.* Asset prices are being bid ever higher and profit is made from the difference between the buying and selling price (arbitrage) even though the intrinsic value of the asset has not materially changed. The higher selling price is made possible (affordable?) by the ready availability of 30 year mortgages. Mortgages are now just a different form of rent. This is really ridiculous when you think about it.
(A nation) is poor precisely because it has been ruled by a narrow elite that has organized society for their own benefit at the expense of the vast mass of people. Political power has been narrowly concentrated, and has been used to create great wealth for those who possess it.
"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless." - Thomas Jefferson
Ads like "sell for more than the house next door" they have got to be kidding. If your grocery store said "We sell food for more than the store next door" they would want to be out of business. Even HUD and Habitat for Humanity are playing with this housing-as-investment nonsense while people are becoming homeless because of it. Thanks for this report.
Failure to pay should not be a cause for eviction straight up. Housing assistance must be pursued first, and that has to be mandatory for landlords to participate in it.
Don’t know what that other commenter is talking about. This video made easy sense. “Financialization of housing” is just describing the ways housing has become more of an investment to make a profit rather than just being a place people build to live in. That has advantages and drawbacks depending on your point of view. But it’s partly at odds with wanting more affordable housing because, obviously if people are investing in homes to sell them for the highest profit that’s also raising prices for the people looking for affordable housing.
welcome to your new job. Your annual raise will be limited to 60% of CPI with no exceptions. Well, there is an appeals process, but we've stacked the board in our favor. Oh, and you are expected to provide all the equipment and materials needed to do the job and regularly update it. We will deduct taxes and other witholdings based on our wants and needs, regardless of what you are earning since we have the rights to your productivity. We will ostracize you in the media and punish you with our laws and ordinances when you are left with too little resources to meet the obligations of your job. We do expect you to keep doing this job for the next 40 years, at our convenience, since it is after all a great deal for you and we both know you would never want to do anything else. If for some reason you do decide to quit, we will only allow you to sell out to us at our price. Welcome aboard!
That is what I say if they are not happy why are they staying. Landlords have to raise rent when they raise property taxes and when they raise home insurance. Landlords have to give a 60 day notice but when your bills are raised on the rentals nobody gives landlords a notice
The above commenters are two of the biggest numbskulls on RU-vid. I’ll say the obvious: People don’t have the money to move. There’s a shortage of affordable housing of all sorts. Landlords have most of the power in the market. People can’t just move.
If Right to Counsel was limited to specific eviction cases, (like retaliatory evictions) I'd be in favor of it - but the vast majority of evictions are from non-payment of rent. Drawing out non-payment of rent cases for months and months is an unfair burden on a landlord, especially small time landlords.
Well first of all rents that rise above the 30% of income rule must be illegal. Second eviction for nonpayment creates homelessness, and preventing it keeps renters housed and landlords paid. Third landlords can have plenty of money from the profits they are making and all the rent increases they do are unregulated because the government wants to jack up the cost of housing for its own gain. So eviction for nonpayment should be a last resort not a first and should not be an automatic eviction.
